- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Sythe Gold
- 33
- Messages
- 1,155
A universal ethic is a moral principle which is universally applicable (ie: can be applied to all people in all situations.)
In other words you haven't made a valid moral argument in support of your position.
Your position is that "smoking breaks should not be given."
But, because it is not your property (money) that is in question, and because the legitimacy of the property is not in question either, and because no other party's property is being damaged by the action, your position has approximately the same moral validity as the statement: "You should not buy strawberry ice-cream on Sundays." -- It is a personal preference that you are trying to pass off as a moral position. Nothing more.
Not exactly. Once again I am not argueing that smoking breaks should not be given. (I know, the thread title is missleading) But more so saying thats a nonsmoker should get just as many breaks as a smoker.
Smoker:Nonsmoker::male:female::black:white
With current laws is this not discrimination. I'm not asking if you personally think we should be able to do this. I'm asking with current laws should both parties get the same break times.



